Citizen, can I talk to my spouse, my kids or my neighbors about God or is it prohibited in your society?
When have I suggested a prohibition of God? As Thomas Paine said in the
Rights of Man, the relationship between any person and their God is a Natural Law and therefore existed outside the boundaries of any government.
Nobody can read your thoughts or divine the relationship you have with God. Our Founding Fathers understood this and wisely chose to not extend civil law into this arena in an attempt to control or influence what is inside our hearts and minds.
You are absolutely free to worship your God as you please. You are free to talk about your God to your spouse, your children, and your neighbors.
The Founders emphasized religious principles, the "self evident" truths, as the foundation of our nation.
I completely agree. There is ample evidence of how much they valued religion in their lives and in society. But they had an opportunity when they created this nation to look at other nations and history to see what models of government worked and which didn't. And they saw how problematic it was to meld both government and religion. I quoted specific incidences of this: Spain and the Inquisition being one that the FFs did not want to repeat.
I do not believe the Founders' would have asserted that it was only the Christian religion from which could be derived the transcendent principles of good citizenship. In a letter to the President of Yale, shortly before his death, Benjamin Franklin articulated an overview of what he considered the essential principles of a sound religion.
Again, I completely agree. They understood the scope of faith and were careful not to narrow it to one or the other. Again, this confirms my point. Bless you.
In that respect, those that say "we are not a Christian nation". . . are correct. However, when it is then further asserted that the Founders were only seeking to establish a secular society and saw no public role for religion in the affairs of the nation, this would be entirely not correct. It is especially a problem today when virtually all religious influence is to be separated from the "State," on the one hand while, on the other hand, "The State" keeps expanding.
And here we'll quibble a bit. They absolutely saw a public role for religion and they saw that role being carried out by the individual and the church, not by the government. Now because our government is made up of the people it cannot be expected that religion won't influence laws and governmental practices. I would never ask that anyone serving in the government leave their religion by the doorstep. It is a fundamental part of who they are.
So if Congress holds a convocation, I don't care. When president after president talks about God and asks that "God bless America." I don't care. I only become concerned when we try to legislate God, or a specific faith into law that is intended to govern citizens who don't all share that faith. This has been a constant battle and one I will vigilantly fight against.
Today, separating church and state, means also separating traditional virtue from an exclusively secular and expanding State. This was the very circumstance that religious freedom was supposed to prevent.
Again, I'll disagree. Most people want government to be as small as possible, to have a role and impact our lives minimally, to allow each person to live as they see fit, and I think for over 200 years our government has managed to do that pretty well.
It's hard for me to understand your complaint. Virtually every politician is religious and talks about the importance of religion and God. You have the freedom to attend any church, practice any faith. You can be as pious and devout as you want. Religion, and especially Christianity is a huge part of our popular culture. It gets constant exposure through radio, television, movies, books and music.
All of this is evidence that we have religious freedom.
What do you see missing here Soleil?